Skip to main content

Highway Guidance Doesn't Match Signage

Bug Reports

There are a couple of issues here:

  1. Exit numbers are often missing (again, they seem to come and go, I think they were largely present in the 3522 build).

  2. The text in the guidance is often a poor match for what is on the exit signage. Sometimes the order / priority is wrong (but at least the text on the sign matches what ABRP shows) other times ABRP shows text that is not on the sign at all.

Taken together this can make for some very stressful & confusing navigation — especially in places where multiple exits are in close proximity & are going to similarly named places (for example an exit for 38th Street Westbound & 38th Street Eastbound that are on the two sides of an overpass).

Where does this happen?
ABRP version number (found at bottom of settings menu)
Posted by ABRP User #811399 ·
Status: Awaiting Clarification8 comments

Log in to comment and vote

Comments8

  • Bo (ABRP)

    Team•

    Aug 11, 2025

    Thanks for the feedback! It would help us a lot if you could create a short plan which includes the troublesome instructions/turns and share the plan URL here. You can long press on the map to add destinations which are simply on the roads.

    • ABRP User #811399

      •

      Aug 12, 2025

      Here you go. Hopefully the guidepoints will help you see the points on the route where the instruction text could be better, the screen captures are at around the same location as the guidepoints.

      7002 Pioneer: the next turn is onto WA-16 towards Port Orchard & Bremerton. The guidance includes the place names, but not the road you’re getting on to.

      WA-16 westbound (1st WA-16 guidepoint): the exit is Burnham Drive. It’s also the exit for the women’s corrections center, but that isn’t on the actual exit sign. Leading up to the exit, there is a sign for Burnham Drive, then a bit farther down the road a sign for the Washington Corrections Center for Women, then finally at the exit a sign that just reads Burnham Drive. If the map data lets you distinguish between the actual exit name or the signage at the exit, perhaps that part could be in bold or a larger font and the auxiliary information could be in a lighter / smaller font. This guidance is presented in a logical order for the exit, but it could be confusing to someone who’s expecting all of that text to be on the sign at the exit.

      WA-16 eastbound: the exit is Wollochet Drive and main part of the sign reads “Wollochet Dr City Center” there is an “add on” blue sign above the main sign which reads “Waterfront” (the blue signs are used for things like services & tourist attractions). I forgot to get a screen capture at this one, but from memory the sign guidance reads “Waterfront Wollochet Drive City Center” I think it is quite possible that someone unfamiliar with the area might be confused because the word “Waterfront” doesn’t appear on the main, green, part of the sign, it is on the blue “add on” sign mounted above the main sign, it is also in a smaller font

      It would be interesting to know where the wording for the guidance comes from. When I look at Open Street Map there doesn’t appear to be anything there that could be used to describe the exit… I assume there must be another source.

      https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=8945bd80-46ed-4b5b-b44d-5795c6fadcc0

      • Bo (ABRP)

        Team•

        Aug 13, 2025

        Thanks for the details! We will look into these examples. Overall, we only use OSM for instructions so data we show is definitely from OSM. However, there could be reasons that we hide it or simply don’t propagate it through the system and we will review this.

        • ABRP User #811399

          •

          Aug 13, 2025

          So, I’ve been learning about OSM, and it appears that for the ones that I’ve looked at so far, the problem with the guidance text is that the destination tags on the link roads aren’t “right” according to me. So, at least for some of the problems it’s an issue of whether OSM has a way to distinguish the “significant” destinations vs. the “interesting places” that are served by the exit — the distinction in my mind being that the “significant” destinations are much more prominently indicated on the signage (and usually on the signs with green backgrounds on US highways) where as the “interesting places” are usually on a sign with a blue background. Both the size and the color of the signs make the “significant” destinations more prominent (and what I think people are reading as they verify that they are taking the right exit. To my way of thinking, in the US ABRP guidance would show exactly the text that is displayed on the green exit sign. If the blue signage were to be included it would be good for it to be in a smaller font and below the “significant” text.

          So, it seems that some of this may require fixes to OSM to make it possible for ABRP to get the signage right.

          The missing exit numbers are a bigger puzzle, they all seem to be there.

        • ABRP User #811399

          •

          Aug 13, 2025

          Does ABRP support the OSM destination_sign relation? That looks like it might be the “right” (or at least a) way to address this. I’ve added it to the sign for the highway exit for this route:

          https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=76d0cc61-154c-4eae-b6c4-0665360a76d4

          • Bo (ABRP)

            Team•

            Aug 14, 2025

            No it does not seem like that is supported and also would not really be necessary to better show prominent destinations. As you say, this is mostly due to OSM data not being good at pointing those out.

            About exit numbers, can you point out a plan which is missing exit numbers in ABRP but has it in the OSM data?

            • ABRP User #811399

              •

              Aug 14, 2025

              The last time I think I noticed the problem was heading north on Interstate 5 out of Tacoma (or perhaps on the return trip) on Saturday. I’m heading up that way again in the next few days, I’ll get screen shots & locations if I notice any that are missing.

            • ABRP User #811399

              •

              Aug 18, 2025

              This route, to the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport via Interstate 5 & WA-518 shows the problem. The route guidance doesn’t include the exit number:

              https://abetterrouteplanner.com/?plan_uuid=adf2e5fe-c177-40ee-a2fe-58eafc0cb214

              In OSM (

              https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit#map=18/47.459112/-122.263423

              ) there appears to be an exit number (154A-B) associated with the junction were it leaves I5 and also with the way going to WA-518 where it becomes 154A after splitting from 154B.

              Here’s what I saw approaching the exit:

              I need to do more digging into how OSM works & the way the ways are tagged here (and what the actual highway configuration is), but something isn’t right. The exit that’s coming up leads to both I405 going north to Bellevue and WA-518 going west towards the airport. I’m not sure that it is even possible to get to I405 southbound from here (the exit is for WA-518) but maybe you could. But regardless I405 ends here, it might continue on across both directions of I5 to the junction with I5, but a driver taking that exit is probably heading for WA-518, not 405. This looks like something that might be an OSM problem — but is there a way to tag the interchange in OSM that would get good guidance here. I think the Primary guidance should read “Exit 154A-B: WA-518 West, North 405” and the Secondary should read “Exit 154A: WA-518 West, Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, Des Moines.”